arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.sr] 8 Jan 2013

Transcription

1 The Coldest Brown Dwarf (Or Free Floating Planet)?: The Y Dwarf WISE C. Beichman 1,2,3, Christopher R. Gelino 1,3, J. Davy Kirkpatrick 1, Travis S. Barman 4, Kenneth A. Marsh 1,5, Michael C. Cushing 6, and E.L. Wright 7 arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.sr] 8 Jan ) Infrared Processing and Analysis Center, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena CA ) Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove Dr., Pasadena CA ) NASA Exoplanet Science Institute, California Institute of Technology, 770 S. Wilson Ave., Pasadena, CA ) Lowell Observatory, 1400 W. Mars Hill Road, Flagstaff, AZ ) School of Physics and Astronomy, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, CF24 3AA 6) Department of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Toledo, 2801 West Bancroft Street, Toledo, OH ) UCLA Physics & Astronomy, PO Box , Los Angeles CA chas *at* ipac.caltech.edu ABSTRACT We have monitored the position of the cool Y dwarf WISEPA J using a combination of ground- and space-based telescopes and have determined its distance to be pc. Its absolute H magnitude, M H = mag, suggests a mass intherange M Jup for ages of Gyrwith aneffective temperatureinthe range K. The broad range in mass is due primarily to the unknown age of the object. Since the high tangential velocity of the object, 51±5 km s 1, is characteristic of an old disk population, a plausible age range of 2-4 Gyr leads to a mass range of 3-6 M Jup based on fits to the (highly uncertain) COND evolutionary models. The range in temperature is due to the fact that no single model adequately represents the 1-5 µm spectral energy distribution (SED) of the source, failing by factors of up to 5 at either the short or long wavelength portions of the spectral energy distribution. The appearance of this very cold object may be affected by non-equilibrium chemistry or low temperature condensates forming clouds, two atmospheric processes that are known to be important in brown dwarf atmospheres but have proven difficult to model. Finally, we argue that there would have to be a very steep upturn in the number density of

2 2 late type Y-dwarfs to account for the putative population of objects suggested by by recent microlensing observations. Whether WISE sits at the low mass end of the browndwarf population or is thefirstexample of a large number of free-floating planets is not yet known. Subject headings: brown dwarfs infrared:stars- individual(wisep J ) - Astrometry - Parallaxes - proper motions - solar neighborhood 1. Introduction A long term goal of infrared sky surveys has been the detection and characterization of substellar objects of progressively lower temperature and mass (Kirkpatrick, Beichman & Skrutskie 1997). The Two Micron All sky survey (2MASS), DEep Near Infrared Southern Sky Survey (DE- NIS) and Sloan Digital Sky Survey (Skrutskie et al. 2006; Epchtein et al. 1997; York et al. 2000) identified the first bona fide field brown dwarfs while coronagraphic studies found the first bona fide brown dwarf companion, Gliese 229B (Nakajima et al. 1995; Oppenheimer et al. 1998). These studies led to the acceptance of the first new spectral classes to be named in over 50 years, the L and T dwarfs (Kirkpatrick et al. 1999) characterized by effective temperatures, T eff, as low as 600 K. Studies of these objects suggested the potential for yet a third class of even colder objects, the Y dwarfs, with temperatures between K. Many examples of L and T dwarfs have now been discovered and their spectral classification is now a fine art (Kirkpatrick 2005). But members of the Y spectral class were elusive until the launch of the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE; Wright et al 2010) which identified over 100 brown dwarfs with low effective temperature, including the first Y dwarfs. (Kirkpatrick et al. 2011; Cushing et al. 2011). In parallel with the WISE survey, targeted imaging of stars has led to the discoveries of planetary mass objects orbiting nearby stars, yielding both young planets, e.g. HR8799 bcde (Marois et al. 2008), β Pic b (Lagrange et al. 2009) and 2M b (Chauvin et al. 2005), as well as a companion to a nearby white dwarf, WD b (Luhman et al. 2011, 2012). Thermal emission has also been detected from Jovian mass planets transiting their parent stars (Deming et al. 2006; Charbonneau et al. 2005). Finally, microlensing studies may have identified a population of Jovian-mass objects with no obvious association to any star and which thus must either be located tens of AU from their hosts or be free floating planets (Sumi et al. 2011). Essential to understanding the nature, physical properties and evolutionary status of these objects is the determination of such properties such as mass, age, composition, and bolometric luminosity. This article describes the first results of a program to use direct imaging to determine distances to these ultra-cool brown dwarfs using parallax measurements. With secure distance measurements it will be possible to estimate the local space density of Y dwarfs and to understand better their physical properties.

3 3 We have taken a sample of twenty objects from the entire all-sky WISE survey that are confirmed to have spectral types (or types estimated from WISE photometry) of T8 and later and have initiated a program of follow-up photometry from ground- and space-based telescopes. From a comparison of apparent and inferred absolute magnitudes for objects of low T eff, e.g. Baraffe et al. (2003); Burrows et al. (2003), we estimate that these objects are within 20 pc of the Sun and so shoud have large astrometric signatures. We are using the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), the Spitzer Space Telescope, and the Keck-II telescope to obtain images with the goal of determining parallactic distances. This paper focuses on the first result of this program, the determination of the distance to WISEPA J , hereafter, WISE which was identified as a potential late-type brown dwarf on the basis of its extreme color, W1-W2 ([3.5µm]-[4.6µm]) > 4 mag (Kirkpatrick et al. 2011). Subsequent near-infrared observations from HST led to its classification as the prototype Y dwarf (Cushing et al. 2011), and finally, on the basis of a broader sample of Y dwarf discoveries have revised the classification to Y2 (Kirkpatrick et al. 2012). 2. Observations The determination of high accuracy positions for cool, low luminosity brown dwarfs is extremely challenging since they are faint for 8-10 m ground-based telescopes and HST in the near-infrared and bright in the mid-ir where they can only be observed with space telescopes of small aperture ( m). As a result we have had to piece together positional information with a variety of telescopes over a range of wavelengths using individual measurements (Table 1) with uncertainties in the range of mas due to either low signal to noise ratio or large beam sizes. A parallax determination will be possible only if these objects prove to quite close-by. Fortunately, this appears to be the case for at least WISE where we are able to determine a parallax of 100 mas. With such a large astrometric signature, relatively coarse positions suffice and many of the instrumental effects that must be taken into account for more distant objects can be ignored. Table 1 lists the observations from WISE and other observatories. Photometric data are presented in Table 3. For WISE we report an average of the 4.6 µm magnitudes from the two epochs and 3σ upper limits in the other bands. For comparison with models we have converted the magnitudes to flux densities using the zero points from Wright et al. (2010), but because of the unknown and extremely non-blackbody-like nature of brown dwarf spectral energy distributions (SED), we have not color-corrected these flux densities HST Observations WISE was observed with HST in the WFC3-IR F140W filter in conjunction with a grism spectrum which was the basis of this object s identification as a Y1 dwarf by Cushing et al. (2011) (Figure 1). The data consist of two pairs of individual 78 sec exposures taken at positions offset by ( α, δ) =0.82 and 5.67 to reduce the effects of cosmic rays and the undersampling of

4 4 the individual frames. The pipeline corrects for the geometric distortion of the WFC3-IR camera to a level estimated to be 5 mas (Kozhurina-Platais et al. 2009) which is of the same order or less than the extraction uncertainties of the faint target. Over 200 sources were extracted from the Space Telescope Science Institute s (STScI) MultiDrizzle mosaic using the Gaussian-fitting IDL FIND routinetodeterminecentroid positionsandtheaperroutine 1 witha3pixelradiusforphotometric measurements. The Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) for these undersampled data is 0.26 consistent with STScI analyses (Kozhurina-Platais et al. 2009). The data were calibrated using the zero-point for Vega magnitudes, ZP(Vega)= mag 2, from the WFC3 Handbook (Rajan 2010). A strong source denoted Source A appears to be slightly extended and is located roughly 5 W and 3 S of WISE This object is seen in the Keck, HST, and Spitzer images and will be used as a local astrometric reference in subsequent analysis. As discussed below, the extracted position of Source A is consistent between the Keck and HST measurements to within 10 mas which is small compared to the other uncertainties Keck NIRC2 Observations WISE was observed in the H-band using the Keck-2 telescope (July 2010) using NIRC2withthelaserguidestarAdaptiveOptics(AO)system(Wizinowich et al.2006;van Dam et al. 2006) and a tip-tilt star located 50 away. The wide-field camera (40 mas/pixel scale; 40 field of view) was used to ensure an adequate number of reference stars for astrometry. A sequence of images with a total integration time of 1080 sec was obtained at airmass of with 2 10 offsets in right ascension and declination (Kirkpatrick et al. 2011). The individual images were sky-subtracted with a sky frame created by the median of the science frames and flat-fielded with a dome flat using standard and custom IDL routines. Individual images were de-warped to account for optical distortion in the NIRC2 camera as described below. The reduced images were shifted to align stars on a common, larger grid and the median average of overlapping pixels was computed to make the final mosaic. The target was detected at a relatively low SNR of 5. As reported in Kirkpatrick et al. (2012), the source was also weakly detected in the J band with NIRC2 at this epoch (Table 3). The source was re-observed in 2011 (Figure 2) and twice in 2012 following the same procedure but for a longer total integration times (3960, 2880 and 2880 sec, respectively), yielding SNR 10 and with smaller offsets (2-4 ) to reduce the effects of optical distortion on the final image. The airmass for the Oct 2011 observations ranged from 1.1 to 1.4 with a mean value of In 2012 July the airmass values ranged between 1.04 to 1.15 with a mean value of In 2012 October, the seeing and photometric conditions were relatively poor with an average airmass of 1.2. The 1 All the photometric measurements reported herein were made using this routine from the IDL ASTRO library, A number of other IDL routines are taken from this library as well. 2 zp lbn

5 5 typical Point Spread Function (PSF) in the final mosaicked images from the first three epochs varies slightly across the field, but at the center of the field close to WISE , the Full Width Half Maximum (FWHM) of the AO-corrected core is 3-4 pixels, or mas. In October 2012, the image quality was about a factor of two worse as is reflected in the poorer astrometric solution described below. Sources were extracted using the IDL APER routine with an aperture radius of 5 pixels. To calibrate these data photometrically we used observations of the WISE field obtained with the Wide Field Infrared Camera (WIRC) (Wilson et al. 2003) at the Palomar 5-m telescope with a MKO-NIR H filter (Tokunaga et al. 2002). The 8.7 field of this camera was sufficient to detect 350 2MASS stars surrounding WISE as well as 6 stars seen in the Keck field. While the Palomar image was not deep enough to detect WISE itself, we were able to calibrate the Keck field using the calibrated WIRC magnitudes of the 6 stars in common. Combined with the 2MASS calibration uncertainties (Carpenter 2001), the overall calibration uncertainty is 5% which is small compared to the uncertainty in the average magnitude for the WISE target itself ( 9%). There is no evidence for variability between the different epochs. No photometry was attempted for 2012 October. The source positions obtained from the Keck images were corrected for the effects of differential refraction relative to the center of the field using meteorological conditions available at the CFHT telescope weather archive 3 to determine the index of refraction corrected for wavelength, local temperature, atmospheric pressure and relative humidity (Lang 1983) and standard formulae (Stone 1996). As discussed in Appendix I, for the small field of view of the NIRC2 images and the relatively low airmasses under consideration here (<1.5), the first order differential corrections we do apply to the source positions are small, <10 mas across the ±20 field and proportionately less at smaller separations. The effects of optical distortion in the wide-field NIRC2 camera were corrected using a distortion map derived by comparing Keck data of the globular cluster M15 taken immediately after the WISE observations in 2011 and July 2012 to HST/WFC3 observations of M15 (Anderson et al. 2008; Yelda et al. 2010). Details of this distortion mapping are described in Appendix I but the correction amounts to < 1 pixel (40 mas) across most of the array and up to 2 pixels at the edges of the array. At the array center where the WISE observations were made, the maximum uncorrected distortion for separations up to 5 is < 20 mas. After our correction procedure the residual distortion errors are less than 10 mas over the entire field. As a test of our ability to co-register data from individual Keck images, we examined the positional dispersions of 15 sources in each apparition with respect to their average positions. For the first three Keck epochs the average dispersion in right ascension and declination is ±6 mas. The last epoch was not considered in this analysis due to poor observing conditions. The ability to register these images to an external reference, i.e. the sources in the HST image, is discussed below ( 3). 3

6 Spitzer Observations The Spitzer Space Telescope observed WISE using Director s Discretionary Time andat threesubsequentgeneralobserverepochs. TheIRACcamera(Fazio et al.2004)wasusedin itsfullarraymodetomakeobservationsat3.5(channel-1)and4.5µm(channel-2)inthefirstepoch and only at 4.5 µm in the subsequent epochs. We analyzed post-bcd mosaics from the Spitzer Science Center (SSC) to make photometric and astrometric measurements, extracting sources using a 3 pixel radius aperture and normalized using SSC-recommended aperture corrections 4. WISE was detected at both 3.5 µm (SNR 10) and at 4.5 µm (SNR>40; Table 3). Source A is seen as a weak but definite detection with about one-sixth the brightness of WISE (SNR=9). We fitted the pixel data for these two objects simultaneously using Gaussian profiles to determine accurately the source centroids. The fitting uncertainties for the two objects in the 4 Spitzer observations are mas for WISE and mas for Source A (Table 6). There was no evidence for variability in the brightness of WISE between the four epochs at the <6% level. Since Source A appears extended at shorter wavelengths, there is a concern that position of Source A might shift with wavelength. There is no evidence for this effect in our data. The Spitzer position for Source A is self-consistent within 15 mas over 4 epochs and consistent with the Keck and HST positions to within ( α, δ)=(60,10) mas which is small relative to the fitting uncertainties for Source A of 120 mas. The IRAC camera has significant optical distortions over its entire field that are corrected in the SSC pipeline to an average residual value of 100 mas over the whole field 5. We have used 20 HST stars observed within ±90 of WISE as probes of the residual distortion as described above for the Keck observations. As a test of our ability to co-register data from individual Spitzer images, we examined the positional dispersions of 22 sources in each apparition with respect to their average positions. The average dispersion in the four Spitzer epochs is ±60 mas in right ascension and declination. The ability to register these images to an external reference, i.e. the sources in the HST image, is discussed below ( 3). These values are less than the quoted 100 mas uncertainty from the SSC, in part because we are confining our observations to the central part of the IRAC array. The total uncertainties in Table 5 reflect the systematic uncertainties combined with a brightness-dependent term for WISE1828. In the case where we consider only offsets from WISE to Source A, the distortion effects will be considerably smaller given the 10 pixel distance between the two objects. From examination of the polynomial expression to the distortion correction given by the SSC, we estimate the distortion component of the uncertainty in the separation between the two sources to be <10 mas, negligible compared to the uncertainties due to the source fitting (Table 6)

7 7 3. Astrometric Data Reduction Following source extraction, we put observations from all telescopes onto a common astrometric frame. This was accomplished in a two-step process. First, to ensure consistency with the WISE positions which are based on the 2MASS astrometric frame (Wright et al. 2010), the HST positions were refined using 11 2MASS sources to solve for the RA and DEC zero points and image rotation. We adopted the nominal STScI pipeline plate scale of arcsec/pixel which is known to an accuracy 0.01% (Kozhurina-Platais et al. 2009). This value agrees with the plate scale derived from the 2MASS sources to within <0.02%, but we adopted the better established pipeline value. Saturation effects on the astrometric centroid for the faint 2MASS sources (H>15 mag) are small (<< the HST pixel) compared to the overall 80 mas uncertainty in the absolute 2MASS reference frame (Skrutskie et al. 2006). Additional evidence that the saturation effects are relatively small comes from the fact that our HST F140W photometry recovers the 2MASS brightness of these 11 objects to within an average ±0.2 mag where we compared the HST data with the simple average of the 2MASS J and H magnitudes. The fit to the HST/2MASS sources yielded a ( α, δ)(initial HST-2MASS)=(-0.50±0.02,0.15±0.05) shift relative to the initial pipeline solution where we adopted the positional uncertainties from the 2MASS catalog to weight the individual sources ( mas with an average value of 180 mas) in the fitting procedure. We believe the 2MASS positional zero points to be correct given the agreement between 9 sources within 2 of WISE appearing in both the 2MASS and the UCAC3 catalogs (Zacharias et al. 2010). The average positional differences between these two catalogs is ( α, δ)(ucac3-2mass)=(0.12±0.01,0.03±0.02). Sources seen in the HST image and seen in either the Keck, Spitzer, or 2MASS data are presented in Table 2. The positional errors associated with the HST data come from a combination of a brightness-dependent term, σ SNR = FWHM/(2 SNR) (Monet et al. 2010) where SNR is the signal-to-noise ratio of a particular measurement, and two terms term depending on distance of the source, R, from the center of the HST field, σ rot = Rdθ and σ scale = Rd(scale)/scale. The latter two terms account for uncertainty in the rotation angle and plate scale. The rotational uncertainty is dθ = o = rad (Table 4). For sources at the edge of the field the positional uncertainty can be as large as 90 mas, but within 20 of the center of the Keck field, for example, the typical uncertainty of an HST source is 5 mas. Parameters of the 2MASS/HST fit are given in Table 4. As shown in the first entry in Table 4, the standard error (σ/ N) in this local frame is approximately 4 mas in each axis. To this local registration uncertainty must be added the overall astrometric accuracy of the 2MASS survey of 80 mas (Skrutskie et al. 2006). However for the differential measurements of interest for the parallax determination, this uncertainty is not important. The new solution was applied to all the HST sources, of which appear in various of the Keck and Spitzer images (Table 2). These refined HST positions were subsequently used to set the astrometric reference frame for all other images.

8 8 We registered the four epochs of Keck imaging to the 2MASS/HST astrometric grid using between stars, solving simultaneously for field center coordinates, rotation, and pixel scale. The solutions yielded offsets relative to the HST frame of <2.5 mas, with a single-axis standard error 3 mas, and fitting errors of < o and 0.02% in field rotation and plate scale, respectively. TheseresultsaresummarizedinTable4. We averaged thekeck positions ofthehstsources forthe first three epochs and compared these to the input HST positions, giving ( α, δ)(keck-hst)=(- 9±5, 5±8 mas) with a dispersion of 24 mas predominantly independent of source brightness. We take this dispersion to be representative of the residual uncertainties in the Adaptive Optics PSF across the field, uncertainties in the rotation and plate csale of the HST data (Table 2), residual optical distortion in both the Keck and HST data, and residual refraction in the Keck data. To establish the uncertainty for a particular object we combine this observed dispersion in a root-meansquare sense with the brightness-dependent term, σ SNR. This latter term is typically small, <10 mas. As noted above, the 2012 October Keck data were obtained under poor conditions resulting in a dispersion of 50 mas with respect to the HST sources. For Spitzer astrometry we used the 4.6 µm (Band 2) Post-BCD mosaics because the source is brighter at this wavelength compared to 3.5 µm and also because of the more symmetric and better sampled PSF at the longer wavelength. We matched HST positions of 20 stars (depending on the intersection of the two fields of view), solving for RA and DEC zero points, rotation angle, and pixel scale. As expected, the Spitzer scale proved to be highly stable over the four epochs of observation and to differ from the SSC value by <0.05%. We adopted the nominal plate scale for our analysis. We determined the rotation angle to < 0.02 o and the positional zero point to mas relative to the HST frame. We averaged the Spitzer positions of the HST sources for the 4 epochs and compared these to the input HST positions, giving ( α, δ)(spitzer-hst)=(7±9,-5±11) mas with a dispersion of 50 mas predominantly independent of source brightness. We take this value to be representative of the residual uncertainties in PSF and distortion in both the Spitzer and HST data that must be applied to all sources. We adopt the slightly larger repeatability measure of ±60 mas obtained in the previous section as the astrometric uncertainty in the Spitzer data; the SNR-related term is negligible by comparison. 4. Results 4.1. Determination of Parallax and Proper Motion Table 5 lists the positions of WISE on the HST/2MASS astrometric grid while Table 6 lists the offsets of WISE relative to source A. Both sets of right ascension and declination data were fitted to a model incorporating proper motion and parallax (Smart 1977; Green 1985):

9 9 α α 0 +µ α (t T 0 )/cos(δ ) δ δ 0 +µ δ (t T 0 ) (1) ( α(t) =α +π X(t)sinα Y(t)cosα ) /cosδ ( δ(t) =δ +π X(t)cosα sinδ +Y(t)sinα sinδ Z(t)cosδ ) (2) where (α 0,δ 0 ) are the source position for equinox and epoch T 0 =J2000.0, µ α,δ are proper motion in the two coordinates in /yr, and π is the annual parallax. The coefficients X(t), Y(t), and Z(t) are the rectangular coordinates of a terrestrial or earth orbiting telescope (WISE, Keck, HST) or Spitzer in its Earth-trailing orbit as seen from the Sun. Values of X,Y,Z for the terrestrial or Earth-orbiting observatories are taken from the IDL ASTRO routine XYZ. Spitzer values of X,Y,Z are obtained from the image headers provided by the SSC. Equations (1) and (2) are solved simultaneously using the Mathematica routine NonLinearModelFit incorporating appropriate uncertainties for each datapoint. Figure 3 shows the fit of the data to this model. Figure 4 shows the fit to parallactic ellipse with the effects of proper motion removed. We developed two solutions, one using best estimates of the time-varying positions of WISE in the HST/2MASS astrometric frame (Method-1; Table 5) and the other using offsets between the source and the nearby object denoted Source A (Method-2; Table 6). The Method-2 position offsets use only the rotation angle and plate scale derived from the full astrometric solution, and should thus be relatively immune to residual distortion and refraction effects that apply across the larger field. On the other hand, the only Method-2 observable is the offset which is compromised by Source-A being both slightly extended in all the images and blended with WISE in the Spitzer images. The two solutions give consistent results (Table 7), yielding parallaxes of 103±16 mas and 79±12 mas and corresponding to distances of pc (Method-1) and pc (Method-2). To generate our final kinematic estimates we combined and fitted simultaneously the Method-1 and Method-2 datasets, Method-(1+2). While the input imaging data are the same in both cases, the sources of uncertainty are different and furthermore, the blending in the Method-2 offsets lowers the significance of the Spitzer results and thereby halves the number of epochs with precise measurements. Figure 5 shows histograms for the parallax and distance solutions from Method-(1+2) resulting from a 10,000-iteration Monte Carlo calculation wherein the source positions were varied according to their Gaussian uncertainties and solutions recorded at each step. While the parallax distribution is consistent with the nominal average value and its associated uncertainties, the distance distribution shows a tail to greater distances expected due to its inverse relationship to the parallax. We derived the asymmetric 1σ distance uncertainties from the Cumulative Distribution Function of the errors (Figure 5b). Ourbest estimate of the distance to WISE is

10 10 pc with a χ 2 =36.3 with 31 degrees of freedom. A model of proper motion plus a non-zero parallax provides a much better fit to the data than a proper motion-only model which yields χ 2 = 135 with 32 degrees of freedom for the Method-(1+2) dataset. On the other hand, there is no evidence that a more complex model, e.g. one including the presence of a perturbing second body in the system, is required. Finally, we note that the parallax determination here is a relative one with respect to nearby references stars (not galaxies, except for Source A). Thus the motions of the reference frame can introduceabiasintotheparallax determination. Sincethisbiasisatthelevel of0.5-2 mas(dupuy & Liu 2012), we can neglect this correction relative to the 100 mas signal of WISE Spectral Energy Distribution WISE is one of the coolest (latest) Y dwarfs yet identified. Available photometry of WISE covers the 1-5 µm range and can compared against the predictions of brown dwarf atmospheric and evolutionary models (Baraffe et al. 2003). Figure 6 shows a number of models fitted to the observations as described below. Unfortunately, none of these models provide a good fit to the full range of the data. The COND models pass through either the two short wavelength points or the 3-5 µm points, but not both. The over- or under-estimates are significant, up to factors of 5, which suggests that the models have omitted one or more important physical processes in the atmosphere, e.g. non-equilibrium chemistry or new absorbers, that dramatically affect the SED. Marley et al. (2010) highlight the importance of clouds in the L/T dwarf transition which greatly change the near-ir (J, H and K band) appearance of these warmer objects. The onset of still lower temperature condensates, e.g. Na 2 S producing sulfide clouds (Morley et al. 2012), may play a role in the appearance of the Y dwarfs (see however Burrows et al. (2003)). While acknowledging the failings of the models in this uncharted range of effective temperature, we will use them to make preliminary estimates of the properties of WISE We take advantage of our knowledge of the distance to the source and use absolute magnitudes rather than relative fluxes to constrain further the evolutionary status of the object. Magnitudes corresponding to the dust-free COND models (Baraffe et al. 2003) were calculated using bandpasses matched to HST, WISE, Spitzer, and ground-based filters. Models were first selected to match either the absolute H magnitude M H = mag or M [4.5]= mag where the uncertainty in the absolute magnitude is dominated by the distance uncertainty. Selecting models matching either absolute magnitude led to two classes of object. Matching the H band absolute magnitude leads to atmospheres with a narrow range of effective temperatures (T eff = 275±40K) but with a broad variation of ages and masses from (0.5 M Jup, 0.05 Gyr) to (8 M Jup, 10 Gyr). Matching the [4.5µm] absolute magnitude leads to hotter, more massive objects (T eff = 450±40K) with a range of ages and masses from (2 M Jup, 0.1 Gyr) to (30 M Jup, 10 Gyr). Matching the absolute magnitudes in F140W, H, and the two Spitzer bands simultaneously, each

11 11 withan uncertainty of 0.25 mag, yields abestfittingmodelwith (0.1 M Jup, 0.1Gyr), T eff = 285K, and a χ 2 =95 for 2 degrees of freedom (4 data points and two parameters). The variation of the quality of fit as a function of mass and age (Figure 7) shows a minimum for a young, low mass object, but a broad valley tending to older, more massive objects. We emphasize the poor quality of the model fits by pointing out that the contour values in Figure 7 show the logarithm of the χ 2 value. Finally, we examined the possibility that the SED could be the result of a combination of two coeval bodies in a binary system (Leggett et al. 2012). Fitting the 4 absolute magnitudes yields a pair of equal mass objects with (0.5 M Jup, 0.05 Gyr), T eff = 285K, and χ 2 = 55. However, since none of these models provides a particularly good fit to the data across the entire 1-5 µm range, the estimated physical parameters should be taken with a grain of salt. What all the solutions have in common is a low T eff K and a mass range of a M Jup depending on the unknown age of the system ( 5.2). Other models lead to a similar range of predicted properties for WISE depending on the wavelength used for the comparison and the assumed mass and/or age. The Marley et al. (2010) and Burrows et al. (2004) models also suggest an effective temperature K which can be associated with a broad range of masses and ages with no single model providing a good simultaneous fit to all of the 1-5 µm observations. Spiegel & Burrows (2012) calculate models for both hot start and cold start formation scenarios (Marley et al. 2007) for ages less than 0.1 Gyr. Matching our data to the predicted absolute H band models for either the cold start or hot start cases yields 1 M Jup objects with ages of Gyr. Matching the predicted M band models (only an approximation to our Spitzer filter) yields objects in the range (1-5 M Jup, Gyr). Differences between the COND models and the Spiegel & Burrows models are relatively minor in the area of age overlap. 5. Discussion 5.1. Physical Properties of WISE The nature of WISE is ambiguous for two reasons. First, the failure of the models to reproduce successfully the SED and absolute magnitudes makes it hard to draw any quantitative conclusions. Second, even with improved models, e.g. ones including clouds or new low-temperature absorbers, there would remain a family of models with roughly similar T eff that are degenerate in mass and age. WISE is similar in appearance to the brown dwarf companion to the 2 Gyr old white dwarf WD (Luhman et al. 2012) located 19.2 pc away. The twofold greater distance to this system has so far prevented a detection of WD B in the 1-2 µm region. As a result, we do not yet have a comparable SED, but the near- to mid-ir colors are comparably

12 12 red with J-[4.5]=9.25±0.35 (Kirkpatrick et al. 2012) for the WISE object and J-[4.5]>7 for WD B. The 3-5 µm colors are also similar, [3.6]-[4.5]= 2.77±0.15 mag for WD B and [3.6]-[4.5]= 2.81±0.06 mag for WISE , although neither of these objects are as red as other Y dwarfs. With an age estimate for the white dwarf it is possible to narrow the mass range for its companion based on its colors. Luhman et al. (2012) suggest a mass of 6-9 M Jup which is consistent with our estimates for WISE in that age range. An important peculiarity of WISE is its bright absolute magnitude, M W2 = mag for its presumed Y2 spectral type. Compared with WD B with an absolute magnitude of M [4.5] =15.5 mag, WISE is > 1 mag more luminous. More troubling, however, is the fact that compared with other Y dwarfs with reasonably secure parallaxes, WISE is > 2 mag brighter than other Y dwarfs in M W2 and, to a lesser extent, brighter than some of the earlier Y dwarfs in M H. Figure 8, which illustrates this problem, is an updated version of the absolute magnitude vs. spectral type figures appearing in Kirkpatrick et al. (2012). This new figure uses recently published Y dwarf parallaxes by Marsh et al. (2012) and Tinney et al. (2012). The locations of WISE and WD B are also shown. The spectral type of WD B has been estimated from its effective temperature since no spectrum is available and only an upper limit is available for the H-band magnitude. However, in both cases it is apparent that the two objects are similarly deviant from the trend set by earlier Y objects. A simple explanation of at least part of the 1.5 mag difference in absolute M [4.5] between WISE and WD B is that WISE is an unresolved, equal mass binary which would increase the total system brightness by 0.7 mag, close to the difference with WD B. Any such companion to WISE would have to have an orbit < 0.5 AU (<0.05 ) to be consistent with the HST and Keck data and if present would eventually manifest itself in either the astrometric data or future spectroscopic data. No such evidence for binarity yet exists. In any event, such an explanation does not account for the significant deviation from the trends established for earlier spectral types. Some other explanation must be sought for the differences in absolute magnitude at 3-4 µm Age of WISE We cannot eliminate solutions corresponding to young, low mass objects for WISE Of the approximately 250 low mass objects (M, L and T spectral types) within 10 of the Sun there are at least three M stars younger than 100 Myr: AU Mic (9.9 pc; Kalas et al. (2004)), GJ 896 B (6.3 pc; Riedel et al. (2011)), and most recently AP Col (4.6 pc) (Henry et al. 2006; Riedel et al. 2011). A number of brown dwarfs have been claimed to be young based on near-ir spectra which indicate low surface gravity. Examples include the L dwarf 2MASS J (Kirkpatrick et al. 2010; Patience et al. 2012) and the nearby, 7.5 pc, L5 brown dwarf 2MASS J (Faherty et al. 2012). If these 2MASS objects are indeed that young, then their masses might be as low as 10 M Jup. As noted above, if WISE were as young as 0.1 Gyr, its mass would

13 13 be only 1-2 M Jup. A young, brown dwarf of this age is certainly a possibility, albeit one with a low probability ( 1%) based on the statistics of nearby low mass objects, i.e. 3 young M stars plus 1 young L dwarf out of 250 low mass objects. The simplest metric for assessing the age of WISE is the directly measured tangential velocity which comes from the proper motion and distance: v tan = 4.74µ/Π = 51±5 km s 1 where µ is the total proper motion and Π the parallax (Smart 1977). This value falls in the middle of the distribution of tangential velocities measured for nearby (< 20 pc) L and T brown dwarfs (see Figure 7, Faherty et al. (2009)). These velocities are consistent with models of disk population with ages of 3-8 Gyr. This range narrows to 2-4 Gyr if the highest velocity objects (v tan > 100 km s 1 are excluded. Within the age range and using fits to the COND models described above, we estimate that the mass of WISE is 3-6 M Jup. A number of authors have used kinematic properties to associate brown dwarfs with nearby young clusters, but the results to date are only suggestive (Faherty et al. 2012). For example, might WISE be a young object could be associated with one of the nearby young moving groups, e.g. AB Dor, β Pic or Tucana/Horlorgium (Zuckerman & Song 2004; Torres et al 2008) or the Argus/IC 2391 group as in the case of AP Col? These groups are located at distances of pcwith ages rangingfrom 8 to 50 MYr. We evaluated possiblegalactic velocity vectors for WISE , (U,V,W), and their associated uncertainties σ U,V,W, from its position, parallax, and proper motion vector determined here for a range of the unknown V rad from -100 to 100 km s 1. We calculated the difference between cluster (U cl,v cl,w cl ) values and possible values for WISE 1828 as a function of V rad : UVW(V rad ) = (U WISE (V rad ) U cl ) 2 +(V WISE (V rad ) V cl ) 2 +(V WISE (V rad ) V cl ) 2 (3) For V rad between -100 to 100 km s 1 there is no good match in (U,V,W) space for any of the six moving groups with ages from 8 to 50 Myr (Table 8; Zuckerman et al. (2004); Riedel et al. (2011)). The smallest separation is UVW 50 km s 1. While it is impossible to rule out the possibility that WISE is a young straggler ejected from one of these groups, it is more likely that WISE is an older, higher mass object Brown Dwarf or Free Floating Planet? The suggestion that a population of free floating planets may be responsible for short duration microlensing events, t M/M Jup day day for M= M Jup (Sumi et al. 2011) immediately leads to the conjecture that objects like WISE might be members of such a population. Sumi et al. (2011) calculate that fitting the distribution of short duration microlensing events requires a population of 1-2 M Jup objects roughly as numerous as all main

14 14 sequence stars ( M ). Quanz et al. (2012) argue that imaging surveys may be starting to reveal a significant number of bound planets located at 10s of AU from low mass stars which would decrease the need for a large population of free-floating, planetary mass objects. The RECONS database (Henry et al. 2006) lists 300 main sequence stars (M-G) within 10 pc, or object pc 3. Estimates of the entire population of Y dwarfs down to the coolest objects are premature but we note that WISE s distance implies a minimum local density of 1.7± pc 3. For WISE to represent the tip of the microlensing iceberg, the populationofsimilarobjects wouldhavetorisevery sharplybelowthefewm Jup massofthisobject. Between 0.1 and 10 M Jup where the Sumi et al. (2011) data are sensitive (Figure 9 of Sumi et al. (2011)), the mass distribution function, dn/dm M α, would have to have to be quite steep. Estimating the mass of WISE using a uniform distribution between 3-6 M Jup yields α = 2.2±0.2 to produce enough extremely low mass dwarfs ( M Jup ) equal in number to the main sequence stars within 10 pc. This is dramatically steeper than the flat Brown Dwarf index, α 0 (Figure 14 in Kirkpatrick et al. (2012)), and steeper than the mass distribution of planets determined by radial velocity studies, α = 1.5 (Cumming et al. 2008; Howard et al. 2010). To date, fourteen free-floating Y dwarfs have been identified(cushing et al. 2011; Kirkpatrick et al. 2012; Tinney et al. 2012). Several other WISE-selected Y dwarf candidates, such as those presented in Griffith et al. (2012), remain but lack spectroscopic confirmation. All are on active parallax and spectroscopic classification campaigns, so it will soon be known if other WISE and WD B analogs exist. Even if, for example, the local density of objects as cool as WISE eventually proves to be 5 times higher than estimated solely on the basis of this one object, then the power law index required to account for the microlensing results would still be > 1.5. In the absence of convincing evidence for an upturn in the mass distribution, the most conservative interpretation is that WISE sits at the low mass end of the brown dwarf distribution rather than at the start of a much larger population of free floating planets. A less conservative interpretation of these results is also possible. As Luhman et al. (2011) themselves suggest WD B could have formed as a 6-9 M Jup object in a protoplanetary disk around its 2 M primary, WD A. Only later, after the primary shed mass during its evolution off the main sequence, would WD B have migrated into a larger orbit, currently of radius 2500 AU. The formation mechanism between the WISE Y0 and Y1 discoveries, which presumably formed via cloud fragmentation as do normal stars, and WB B would thus be different. Compositional differences should be seen between the two types of objects, given that chemical differentiation is expected in a proto-planetary disk and not in a star formation cloud. Jupiter s enhanced metallicity is an obvious example of this difference (Wong et al. 2004). Objects formed via core accretion may also have a pronounced core of heavy elements as inferred for transiting planets (Rogers & Seager 2010) which might manifest itself in significant ways. Such differences between these two classes could possibly account for the discrepancies noted in the absolute magnitude versus spectral type diagrams of Figure 8.

15 15 Taking this one step further, the similarity between WD B and WISE may be a direct reflection of the fact that both objects were birthed via the same process. In this case, WISE would be a free-floating planet that, given our mass estimate of 3-6 M Jup, would fall at the high-mass end of the rogue planet population proposed by Sumi et al. (2011). In this case, the poor agreement with theoretical spectra may be a consequence of a poor match between the true elemental abundances or interior structure of WISE and those in the model assumptions. If the space density of truly free-floating planets measured by Sumi et al. (2011) is correct, then there should be colder examples (<300K) at much smaller distances (<<10 pc) than WISE itself. Some of these may yet be discoverable at lower signal-to-noise ratios in the WISE data. 6. Conclusions We have used images from four telescopes to determine the parallax and distance to the >Y2 dwarf WISE At pc, the object is among the coolest, lowest luminosity objects yet discovered in the solar neighborhood. The high tangential motion of the object suggests an age of 2-4 Gyr with a mass of 3-6 M Jup. However, the absolute magnitude of WISE is brighter by several magnitudes (depending on wavelength) than extrapolated from other Y dwarfs making the true nature of this source somewhat of a mystery. WISE is similar in color and absolute magnitude to the cool object orbiting the nearby white dwarf WD B. The exact nature and evolutionary state, including its mass and age, of WISE will require further observation and theoretical investigation. The proximity of WISE and other Y dwarfs will allow more precise determinations of their motions in the coming years as well as a search for any astrometric companions that might fall below detectability via direct imaging. The launch of JWST will allow measurement of the spectrum of WISE and other objects with similarly low T eff from the deep red through to the mid-infrared, resulting in a much more detailed physical characterization and a better assessment of their ages and masses. Y dwarfs like WISE and the companion WD B will become touchstones for spectroscopic modeling with direct applicability to the atmospheres of bona-fide planets now being measured with transit spectroscopy and direct imaging, e.g. Barman et al. (2011). The differences expected between bound objects ( planets ) and freefloating objects (likely brown dwarfs, but possibly free floating planets ) should produce distinct spectroscopic markers distinguishable in the high SNR, high spectral resolution measurements possible with JWST. The research described in this publication was carried out in part at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. This publication makes use of data products from the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer, which is a joint project of the University of California, Los Angeles, and the Jet

16 16 Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Infrared Science Archive (IRSA), which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. This work is based in part on observations made with the Spitzer Space Telescope, which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with NASA. Support for this work was provided by NASA through an award issued to program and by JPL/Caltech. This work is also based in part on observations made with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS These observations are associated with program Support for program #12330 was provided by NASA through a grant from the Space Telescope Science Institute. Some data presented herein were obtained at the W. M. Keck Observatory from telescope time allocated to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration through the agency s scientific partnership with the California Institute of Technology and the University of California. The Observatory was made possible by the generous financial support of the W. M. Keck Foundation. The authors wish to recognize and acknowledge the very significant cultural role and reverence that the summit of Mauna Kea has always had within the indigenous Hawaiian community. We are most fortunate to have the opportunity to conduct observations from this mountain. In addition we wish to acknowledge the generosity of Jay Anderson in sending HST data for the clusters M15 and M92 and useful discussions with Andy Gould. The RECONS database of nearby stars remains an invaluable resource. We used the IRSA archive at IPAC to access the 2MASS catalogs. 7. Appendix I. Differential Refraction and Distortion Mapping The positions of sources in the Keck images were corrected for the effects of differential refraction. The error introduced by coadding before source extraction is small compared to other sources of astrometric error. We applied to each extracted position a correction α,δ = α,δ (HA 0,δ 0,λ 0 ) α,δ (HA + HA,δ 0 + δ,λ 0 ) relative to the center of the field where HA 0 and δ 0 are the hour angle and declination at the center of the field with the HA specified at the middle of the roughly hour-long observational sequence. λ 0 is the central wavelength of the H-band filter. Figure 9 shows 2 nd order corrections to the differential refraction as a function of Hour Angle during the duration of one observation and for a change in effective wavelength across the H band. The curves show the changes in the differential refraction from the nominal 1 st order correction at one corner of the Keck field of view ( 20 2, center to corner). At the level of precision required for these measurements, these 2 nd order differential effects can safely be ignored over the small Keck field. To assess the effects of optical distortion on NIRC2 images in the wide field mode (40 mas pixels) we followed the procedure outlined in Yelda et al. (2010) using HST observations of the cluster M15. The HST data (Anderson et al. 2008) were corrected for the effects of non-orthogonal

17 17 axes (coordinate skew). Keck observations of M15 were made in the H band using NIRC2 with a natural guide star Adaptive Optics at 2 epochs (Oct 2011 and July 2012). In July 2012 observations were made at 3 different orientations of the NIRC2 camera (0 o,±45 o ). At each rotation angle and epoch the telescope was stepped through a 9 position pattern across the cluster for a total of 36 separate observations of some portion of the cluster with each image containing between matches between the Keck and HST source lists. The Keck data were extracted using IDL aper routine with a 5 pixel radius. After correction for the effects of differential refraction, lists of sources extracted from each image were rotated and shifted into registration with the HST stars. In total the HST stars probed5631 unique(x,y) positions in the NIRC2 focal plane (Figure 10). Nominal (α,δ) positions were obtained for the Keck sources using plate scale and rotational information derived from the image registration. Noise-weighted differences between the Keck and HST positions, ( α, δ), were fitted to a fourth order polynomial as a function of focal plane coordinates (x,y) using the Mathematica routine LinearModelFit. The derived coefficients for transformation from native, distorted (x,y) pixel coordinates into un-distorted, (x,y ) pixel coordinates are given in Eqns. 4-5 and Table 9. The coordinate system is centered at the center of the NIRC2 array and extends from ±512. x =a 0 +a 1 x+a 2 y +a 3 x 2 +a 4 xy +a 5 y 2 +a 6 x 3 +a 7 x 2 y a 8 xy 2 +a 9 y 3 +a 1 0x 4 +a 1 1x 3 y +a 1 2x 2 y 2 +a 1 3xy 3 +y 4 (4) y =b 0 +b 1 x+b 2 y +b 3 x 2 +b 4 xy +b 5 y 2 +b 6 x 3 +b 7 x 2 y b 8 xy 2 +b 9 y 3 +b 1 0x 4 +b 1 1x 3 y +b 1 2x 2 y 2 +b 1 3xy 3 +y 4 (5) Standard equations then project the (x,y ) pixel coordinates onto the sky accounting for plate scale and rotation angle. Our H-band plate scale of ±0.004 mas/pixel is consistent with the 39.82±0.25 mas/pix from Metchev & Hillenbrand (2004) from comparison with a known binary system and somewhat smaller than the 39.90±0.08 and 39.86±0.02 K s plate scales derived separately in x- and y- by Pravdo et al. (2006) from comparison with 17 HST stars. Examination of the residuals led to the rejection of <2% of the data, i.e. 100 points that deviated significantly in either amplitude or orientation from their neighbors. The first plot of the Figure 10 triptych shows Keck-HST positions differences as vectors. The central image shows a vector representation of the 4 th order polynomial fitted to the distortion map. The third image shows the residuals in the Keck-HST differences after subtraction of the polynomial fit. The mean value of the Keck-HST residuals after the model subtraction in focal plane coordinates is (x,y) = (0.2 ± 10,1.0 ± 13) mas. The distortion map was applied to the individual Keck images using an IDL script for de-warping developed by the Keck Observatory observing/dewarp/

18 18 REFERENCES Alibert, Y., Mousis, O., Mordasini, C., & Benz, W. 2005, ApJ, 626, L Anderson, J., Sarajedini, A., Bedin, L. R., et al. 2008, AJ, 135, 2055 Baraffe, I., Chabrier, G., Barman, T. S., Allard, F., & Hauschildt, P. H. 2003, A&A, 402, 701 Barman, T. S., Macintosh, B., Konopacky, Q. M., & Marois, C. 2011, ApJ, 733, 65 Burrows, A., Sudarsky, D., & Lunine, J. I. 2003, ApJ, 596, 587 Burrows, A., Sudarsky, D., & Hubeny, I. 2004, ApJ, 609, 407 Carpenter, J. M. 2001, AJ, 121, 2851 Charbonneau, D., Allen, L. E., Megeath, S. T., et al. 2005, ApJ, 626, 523 Chauvin, G. et al. 2005, A&A, 438, L29. Cutri, R. M., Wright, E. L., Conrow, T., et al. 2011, Explanatory Supplement to the WISE Preliminary Data Release Products, 1 Cumming, A., Butler, R. P., Marcy, G. W., et al. 2008, PASP, 120, 531 Cushing, M. C., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Gelino, C. R., et al. 2011, ApJ, 743, 50 Deming, D., Harrington, J., Seager, S., & Richardson, L. J. 2006, ApJ, 644, 560 Dupuy, T. J., & Liu, M. C. 2012, ApJS, 201, 19 Epchtein, N., de Batz, B., Capoani, L., et al. 1997, The Messenger, 87, 27 Faherty, J. K., Burgasser, A. J., Cruz, K. L., et al. 2009, AJ, 137, 1 Faherty,J.K., Rice, E.L., Cruz,K.X, Mamajek,E.E, Nunez,A. 2012, arxiv: v2 Fazio, G. G., Hora, J. L., Allen, L. E., et al. 2004, ApJS, 154, 10 Green, R.M. 1985, Spherical Astronomy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.186. Griffith, R. L., Kirkpatrick, J. D., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., et al. 2012, AJ, 144, 148 Henry, T. J., Jao, W., Subasavage, J. P., Beaulieu, T. D., Ianna, P. A., Costa, E., & Mendez,R. A. 2006, AJ, 132, 2360 (see also Howard, A. W., Marcy, G. W., Johnson, J. A., et al. 2010, Science, 330, 653 Kalas, P., Liu, M. C., & Matthews, B. C. 2004, Science, 303, 1990

19 19 Kirkpatrick, J. D., Beichman, C. A., & Skrutskie, M. F. 1997, ApJ, 476, 311 Kirkpatrick, J. D., Reid, I. N., Liebert, J., et al. 1999, ApJ, 519, 802 Kirkpatrick, J. D. 2005, ARA&A, 43, 195 Kirkpatrick, J. D., Cushing, M. C., Gelino, C. R., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 19 Kirkpatrick, J. D., Gelino, C. R., Cushing, M. C., et al. 2012, ApJ, 753, 156 Kozhurina-Platais, V., Cox, C., McLean, B., et al. 2009, Space Telescope WFC Instrument Science Report, 34 Lagrange, A. M. et al. 2009, A&A, 493, L21. Lang, K.R. Astrophysical Formulae: A Compendium for the Physicist and Astrophysicist (Springer Study Edition), p Leggett, S. K., Morley, C. V., Marley, M. S., et al. 2012, arxiv: Luhman, K. L., Burgasser, A. J., & Bochanski, J. J. 2011, ApJ, 730, L9 Luhman, K. L., Burgasser, A. J., Labbé, I., et al. 2012, ApJ, 744, 135 Marley, M. S., Fortney, J. J., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., & Lissauer, J. J. 2007, ApJ, 655, 541 Marley, M. S., Saumon, D., & Goldblatt, C. 2010, ApJ, 723, L117 Marley, M. S., Saumon, D., Cushing, M., et al. 2012, ApJ, 754, 135 Marois, C., Macintosh, B., Barman, T., et al. 2008, Science, 322, 1348 Marsh, K. A., Wright, E. L., Kirkpatrick, J. D., et al. 2012, arxiv: Metchev, S. A., & Hillenbrand, L. A. 2004, ApJ, 617, 1330 Monet, D. G., Jenkins, J. M., Dunham, E. W., et al. 2010, arxiv: Morley, C. V., Fortney, J. J., Marley, M. S., et al. 2012, arxiv: Nakajima, T., Oppenheimer, B. R., Kulkarni, S. R., et al. 1995, Nature, 378, 463 Oppenheimer, B. R., Kulkarni, S. R., Matthews, K., & van Kerkwijk, M. H. 1998, ApJ, 502, 932 Quanz, S.P. Lafreni ere, D. Meyer, M. R., Reggiani, M. M., and Buenzli, E., Pravdo, S. H., Shaklan, S. B., Wiktorowicz, S. J., et al. 2006, ApJ, 649, 389 Rajan, A. et al. 2010, WFC3 Data Handbook, Version 2.1, (Baltimore: STScI).

20 20 Riedel, A. R., Murphy, S. J., Henry, T. J., et al. 2011, AJ, 142, 104 Rogers, L. A., & Seager, S. 2010, ApJ, 712, 974 Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163 Smart, W.M. Textbook on Spherical Astronomy, 6 th Ed., Cambridge, UK:Cambridge Univ Press, p Spiegel, D. S., & Burrows, A. 2012, ApJ, 745, 174 Stone, R. C. 1996, PASP, 108, 1051 Sumi, T., Kamiya, K., Bennett, D. P., et al. 2011, Nature, 473, 349 Tinney, C. G., Faherty, J. K., Kirkpatrick, J. D., et al. 2012, ApJ, 759, 60 Tokunaga, A. T., Simons, D. A., & Vacca, W. D. 2002, PASP, 114, 180 Torres, C., Quast, G., Melo, C. & Sterzik, M. 2008, Handbook of Star Forming Regions,Volume II: The Southern Sky ASP Monograph Publ., Vol. 5., ed. Bo Reipurth, p.757 van Dam, M. A., et al. 2006, PASP, 118, 310 Wizinowich, P. L., et al. 2006, PASP, 118, 297 Wilson, J. C., Eikenberry, S. S., Henderson, C. P., et al. 2003, Proc. SPIE, 4841, 451 Wong, M. H., Mahaffy, P. R., Atreya, S. K., Niemann, H. B., & Owen, T. C. 2004, Icarus, 171, 153 Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 1868 Yelda, S., Lu, J. R., Ghez, A. M., et al. 2010, ApJ, 725, 331 York, D. G., Adelman, J., Anderson, J. E., Jr., et al. 2000, AJ, 120, 1579 Zacharias, N., Finch, C., Girard, T., et al. 2010, AJ, 139, 2184 Zuckerman, B., & Song, I. 2004, ARA&A, 42, 685 Zuckerman, B., et al., 2004, ApJ, 613,L65 This preprint was prepared with the AAS L A TEX macros v5.2.

21 21 Table 1. Observing Log Telescope Epoch Modified Julian Date Comment WISE Keck/NIRC2-LGS PI, Wright Spitzer/IRAC PI, Mainzer, PropID=9/551 WISE Spitzer/IRAC PI, Kirkpatrick, PropID=10/70062 HST/WFC3-IR PI, Kirkpatrick,PropID=12330 Keck/NIRC2-LGS PI, Beichman Spitzer/IRAC PI, Kirkpatrick,PropID=10/80109 Spitzer/IRAC PI, Kirkpatrick,PropID=10/80109 Keck/NIRC2-LGS PI, Beichman Keck/NIRC2-LGS PI, Beichman

22 22 Table 2. HST Sources in Other Datasets RA DEC F140W σ Center Posn. Dataset (J2000) (J2000) (mag) (mag) Dist.( ) Err. (mas) Spitzer,2MASS Spitzer Spitzer Spitzer,2MASS Spitzer Spitzer Keck Keck Keck Keck Keck Spitzer Keck Spitzer,Keck Keck Spitzer,2MASS Keck Spitzer Spitzer,Keck Spitzer,Keck Keck Spitzer,Keck Keck Spitzer,Keck Spitzer Spitzer,2MASS Spitzer,2MASS Spitzer Spitzer Spitzer,2MASS Spitzer Spitzer,2MASS Spitzer,2MASS Spitzer,2MASS Spitzer,2MASS Spitzer Spitzer,2MASS Spitzer

23 23 Table 3. Photometry for WISE Telescope Date,UT Filter λ(µm) Mag. (mag) SNR F ν (µjy) 1 Keck/NIRC J ± ± 0.21 HST/WFC F140W ± ± 0.07 Keck/NIRC2 Average H ± ± 0.09 Keck/NIRC H ± ± 0.25 Keck/NIRC H ± ± 0.13 Keck/NIRC H ± ± 0.12 WISE W >18.5 <12 Spitzer/IRAC Ch ± ± 1.1 Spitzer/IRAC Average Ch ± ± 9 Spitzer/IRAC Ch ± ± 13 Spitzer/IRAC Ch ± ± 13 Spitzer/IRAC Ch ± ± 12 Spitzer/IRAC Ch ± ± 12 WISE W ± ± 18 WISE W >12.5 <290 WISE W >8.8 <2501 Note. 1 Flux densities have not been color-corrected. 2 Uncertainty weighted average, including 5% calibration uncertainty. 3 Keck NIRC2/LGS resultfromkirkpatrick et al. (2011). 4 Upperlimits are 95% confidence. 5 Includes 3% IRAC calibration uncertainty.

24 24 Table 4. Registration of Images Tel-1/Tel-2 Date(UT) Number of α 1 δ 1 σ (2) mean Rot. Unc. 3 Stars (mas) (mas) (mas) (deg) HST/2MASS ± Keck/HST ± Spitzer/HST ± Spitzer/HST ± Keck/HST ± Spitzer/HST ± Spitzer/HST ± Keck/HST ± Keck/HST ± Note. 1) Difference between two reference frames; 2) Standard deviation of the mean, (σ/ N),in the offset in RA, DEC between stars observed with both telescopes; 3) Uncertainty in image rotation; 4) after removal of ( α, δ)(initial HST-2MASS)=(-0.50±0.02,0.15±0.05) offset.

25 25 Table 5. Astrometric Data for WISE Telescope Date(UT) MJD 1 RA (sec) 2 DEC( ) 2 Uncertainty( ) 3 WISE Mar Keck Jul Spitzer Jul WISE Sep Spitzer Dec Hubble 2011-May Keck Oct Spitzer Nov Spitzer May Keck Jul Keck Oct Note. 1) MJD=Modified Julian Date; 2) Relative to 18 h 28 m and +26 o 50 m (J2000.0); 3)Excludes 80 mas uncertainty in absolute 2MASS reference frame. 4) Not included in fitting due to large uncertainties. Table 6. Astrometric Data for WISE With Respect to Source A Telescope MJD 1 α(bd-srca, ) δ(bd-srca, ) Uncertainty( ) 2 Keck Spitzer Spitzer HST Keck Spitzer Spitzer Keck Keck Note. 1) MJD=Modified Julian Date; 2) Includes uncertainties due to extraction uncertainties, field rotation, residual Keck distortion.

26 26 Table 7. Parallax And Proper Motion Parameter Method-1 1 Method-2 2 Method-(1+2) (2) µ α ( /yr) 0.969± ± ±0.011 µ δ ( /yr) 0.157± ± ± Parallax, π,( ) 0.103± ± ± Distance (pc) α 3 J s ±0.077 s s ±0.012 s s±0.009s δj ± ± ±0.147 χ 2 (with # deg. of freedom) 18.6 (13) 12.7 (13) 36.3 (31) Adopted Distance 4 (pc) Tangential Velocity 4, v tan (km s 1 ) Note. 1) Based on absolute coordinates ; 2) Based on offsets from Source A; 3) With respect to 18 h 28 m and 26 o 50. The random uncertainty does not include 80 mas uncertainty in absolute 2MASS reference frame. 4) From the combination of Method-1 and Method-2. Table 8. Cluster Kinematics and WISE Name 1 Age U (2) V W Min UVW (3) (Myr) (km s 1 ) (km s 1 ) (km s 1 ) (km s 1 ) Argus/IC TW Hydrae Tucana/Horologium β Pictoris AB Doradus η Chamaeleontis Columba Note. 1 Cluster data from Zuckerman et al. (2004); Torres et al (2008); 2 Cluster velocities are calculated such that U is positive toward the Galactic Center; 3 Smallest difference between (U,V,W) for WISE 1828 and a cluster within a range of unknown V rad between -100 and 100 km s 1.

27 27 Table 9. H Band Distortion Coefficients Parameter X-Estimate X-Uncertainty Y-Estimate Y-Uncertainty const x y x x y y x x 2 y xy y x x 3 y x 2 y xy y

28 28 Fig. 1. An HST WFC3/F140W image of WISE with the reference stars used for the co-registration of the Spitzer, HST, and Keck fields circled in red; a few of the 2MASS reference stars fall outside of the image shown here to preserve an adequate scale in the vicinity of the WISE source. The absolute positions were derived with respect to 11 2MASS stars spread over the entire HST field. The positions of WISE at different epochs are shown in an inset with HST positions in red, Spitzer positions in green, and Keck positions in orange. The alternate astrometric reference denoted Source A appears to be slightly extended and is located to the southwest of WISE

29 Fig. 2. A Keck-II H-band image of WISE obtained with the NIRC2 instrument using the laser guide star Adaptive Optics system. The image is 25 across with North up and East to the left. Thesolid lineis2 inlength andsits justtotheeastofwise whichiscircled inred. Also shown are three of the reference stars used to establish the astrometric reference (Figure 1). The alternate astrometric reference ( Source A ) is circled and is located to the southwest of WISE